Yes that is true while I am old school when it comes to stats. I am starting to understand there is a whole different group who use Sabremetrics when discussion baseball and forget other aspects of the game.

I think they should create another award and call it the Bill James award and its for the best Sabremetric season by a player that way those who love advance stats can go and debate that award and not have to use any other thing but stats.

To me Cabrera is the MVP as down the stretch he was in the middle of everything Detroit did and his numbers just got better as the meaningful games took place.

Trout's numbers got worse as the pennant race took shape....mind you still amazing numbers just not as good as Cabrera's numbers.

Cabrera pulled ahead after the All-Star break and out distanced Trout in the backstretch of the season

You don't even have to look at sabremetrics to know Trout was better. There is a misconception out there that Trout vote for MVP thing was only being put out there because of sabremetrics stats when in fact, that's not true at all unless you consider OBP/stolen bases/runs scored/defense to be sabremetrics stuff. Cabrera produced a slightly better OPS but it isn't a big enough gap to justify all the other things Trout did like steal 49 bases, put up a better on base percentage, scored more runs despite fewer games (lead the AL in runs scored -- got on base a lot, got into scoring position a lot more often and gave his teammates the opportunity to drive him in) and he played elite level defense while Cabrera... sucks at playing defense and you don't even need advanced stats for that -- just look at the eye test.

Trout was a much much much better player all-around and provided more value to his team with all the things he did. Its too bad the Hank Aaron awards isn't more recognized because it should be as its awarded to the best hitter and Cabrera certainly was that, but he was not the most VALUABLE player.

The fact that you even suggested "going for the long sac fly" should open your eyes to the fact that rbi's are a joke of a stat. The fact that you can hit the ball to the middle of the outfield (intentional or not) and get an rbi because a player in front of you was able to make it to 3rd with less than 2 outs is what makes it subjective. You did nothing to put that runner on base or ensure he was in scoring position.

Plain and simple, the amount of run-producing opportunities you get in a season is nothing but LUCK.

Your understanding of the game seems to be very limited. Did you ever play?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nasty Nazem

Cabrera produced a slightly better OPS but it isn't a big enough gap to justify all the other things Trout did like steal 49 bases, put up a better on base percentage, scored more runs despite fewer games

The OBP was virtually identical for the two. Of course he scored more runs, he was a leadoff hitter (and runs scored is entirely determined by the rest of your team to drive you in, RBIs, something that Cabrera dominated at).

You don't even have to look at sabremetrics to know Trout was better. There is a misconception out there that Trout vote for MVP thing was only being put out there because of sabremetrics stats when in fact, that's not true at all unless you consider OBP/stolen bases/runs scored/defense to be sabremetrics stuff. Cabrera produced a slightly better OPS but it isn't a big enough gap to justify all the other things Trout did like steal 49 bases, put up a better on base percentage, scored more runs despite fewer games (lead the AL in runs scored -- got on base a lot, got into scoring position a lot more often and gave his teammates the opportunity to drive him in) and he played elite level defense while Cabrera... sucks at playing defense and you don't even need advanced stats for that -- just look at the eye test.

Trout was a much much much better player all-around and provided more value to his team with all the things he did. Its too bad the Hank Aaron awards isn't more recognized because it should be as its awarded to the best hitter and Cabrera certainly was that, but he was not the most VALUABLE player.

Why are stolen bases considered more valuable than HR's or RBI's? I guess you can pick and choose your stats to suit your argument. Are there any statistical measures that account for the position you bat in the lineup? Seems to me Trout would have an easier time scoring runs with a guy like Pujols batting 3rd as compared to Young batting 5th for the Tigers. Cabrera had much better stats in late and close situations as compared to Trout, better stats with RISP and 2 outs. This is what makes baseball interesting but it isn't interesting when people tell you what an injustice it is that Cabrera won the MVP. If Trout should have won MVP then let's just get rid of voting and base the MVP off of who had the highest WAR.

Your understanding of the game seems to be very limited. Did you ever play?

The OBP was virtually identical for the two. Of course he scored more runs, he was a leadoff hitter (and runs scored is entirely determined by the rest of your team to drive you in, RBIs, something that Cabrera dominated at).

I don't know about entirely determined. Miggy is a terrible baserunner and really is only going to be driven in if he himself hits a homerun, or Prince hits a homerun with him on base. While Trout has the ability to steal, go 1st to 3rd or 1st to home.

Your understanding of the game seems to be very limited. Did you ever play?

The OBP was virtually identical for the two. Of course he scored more runs, he was a leadoff hitter (and runs scored is entirely determined by the rest of your team to drive you in, RBIs, something that Cabrera dominated at).

Played at a very high level right through university actually.

I don't know what you're looking for. You're using antequated stats. You seem to think that Cabrera had some influence in ensuring he had baserunners in scoring position when he stepped to the plate.

Trout made a large impact on the basepaths... 49sb's is incredible. He also played Gold Glove calibre defense, something that Cabrera didn't do.

Maybe you're marred by the fact that Detroit made the playoffs and the Angels didn't. But this shouldn't really have an effect on the decision (even though it does). The award is judged based on the Most Valuable Player to his TEAM. And simply put using modern statistics Trout is clearly the most valuable to his own team.

Do you still use a typewriter? Do you use a telephone with rottary dial?

Why? Because it'd be silly to sell low, or do you think he's finally going to have a good season?

At this point I don't see how trading him makes any sense unless we are getting his potential value rather than what he is currently worth. I understand he is streaky at the plate and strikes out too much. However he is still a quality outfielder with good speed and is controllable for at least another 2 years (if I remember correctly). I think with Colby we just need to take the good with the bad and hope eventually he eventually turns into the player, many people believe he could turn out to be.

At this point I don't see how trading him makes any sense unless we are getting his potential value rather than what he is currently worth. I understand he is streaky at the plate and strikes out too much. However he is still a quality outfielder with good speed and is controllable for at least another 2 years (if I remember correctly). I think with Colby we just need to take the good with the bad and hope eventually he eventually turns into the player, many people believe he could turn out to be.

Yeah it would be silly to move him now. You're either all in or selling. And with this recent mega trade we're all-in. Unless we're getting value for value, it doesn't make sense to trade an elite defender with a ton of potential for prospects or someone that you can only hope is better than him.

You don't even have to look at sabremetrics to know Trout was better. There is a misconception out there that Trout vote for MVP thing was only being put out there because of sabremetrics stats when in fact, that's not true at all unless you consider OBP/stolen bases/runs scored/defense to be sabremetrics stuff. Cabrera produced a slightly better OPS but it isn't a big enough gap to justify all the other things Trout did like steal 49 bases, put up a better on base percentage, scored more runs despite fewer games (lead the AL in runs scored -- got on base a lot, got into scoring position a lot more often and gave his teammates the opportunity to drive him in) and he played elite level defense while Cabrera... sucks at playing defense and you don't even need advanced stats for that -- just look at the eye test.

Trout was a much much much better player all-around and provided more value to his team with all the things he did. Its too bad the Hank Aaron awards isn't more recognized because it should be as its awarded to the best hitter and Cabrera certainly was that, but he was not the most VALUABLE player.

I look at it from July on when the pennant races started to heat up and when games matter. Here are the slash lines from each player. Sorry don't know how to make it look better.

You look at Cabrera and he really pulled away from August on and not only that with all the pressure of the triple crown weighing on him came thru. You cannot measure that part in the MVP by stats alone.

You look at Cabrera and he really pulled away from August on and not only that with all the pressure of the triple crown weighing on him he came thru. You cannot measure that part in the MVP by stats alone.

Trout started strong but faded when the games meant more and the season wore on.

Not saying Trout did not have an MVP worthy year but Cabrera was just a little bit better.

To me you just can't look at a guys stat line and say he was the MVP you have to watch the season see how it unfolds and how guys perform in a pennant race if he helped keep his team in the hunt or propel them to a playoff spot. There is way more to be looked at besides a stat line.

Until they clarify what an MVP is there will be times when a guy like A-Rod will win it from a last place team. He had a great offensive year but in no way helped his team achieve success.

Without a clear definition a guy can have a monster season and his team will only 63 games but can be an argument if he was not on that team they may have only won 34 games.

I think Rasmus' value is pretty low, but packaging him up with JP could fetch a good piece. Most likely a #2/3 with control + potential, a la Brett Anderson.

I'm not sure what teams are interested in acquiring an LF/CF plus a catcher though.

Ya man, that's where I got the idea lol.

I was interested in what they said about trading both, putting Bonifacio in CF, and acquiring another middle infielder.

I was wondering particularly, about Ian Kinsler. I am not too familiar with the Rangers needs but I figure they're losing Napoli and Arencibia might be attractive. Rasmus is also a good piece who could play OF instead of Nelson Cruz?

I was interested in what they said about trading both, putting Bonifacio in CF, and acquiring another middle infielder.

I was wondering particularly, about Ian Kinsler. I am not too familiar with the Rangers needs but I figure they're losing Napoli and Arencibia might be attractive. Rasmus is also a good piece who could play OF instead of Nelson Cruz?

(don't rip me up too much for this, thanks)

yes I was thinking the same thing. You do a Rasmus+JPA for Kinsler and prospect and you just got yourself your 2nd baseman.

Those are the breaks. Trout didn't do even remotely as well as Cabrera when it counted. At the end of the day, one was quantitatively more valuable than the other, nobody is 'at fault' but those are how the chips fell. C'est la vie.

Trout did just as well as Cabrera when it counted, which I have already showed you based on their RBI's per RBI opportunities. Why are you ignornig this?

I agree with your statement: one was more quantitatively valuable than the other -- Trout.

C'est la vie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sokil

I would also like to add that this discounting of certain fundamental stats because of disparities in opportunity or attribution to team play don't fly in hockey (as this is a hockey board). Nobody says assists (and therefore, points) shouldn't count for the Hart trophy because those are a team stat. If they did they'd be laughed at.

Just because you are a hockey fan (not everyone on here is), and hockey uses fundamental basic stats, doesn't mean baseball is incorrect for creating formulas that showcase a more advanced understanding.

Choo is available and would be a great target for our LF position. The Korean is truly one of the more underrated players in the game and will fill a huge hole in LF.

I think a deal is doable without including D'Arnaud. Cleveland might have interest in Anthony Gose and that's okay as Rasmus is totally fine in CF for us.

Choo - Rasmus - Bautista solidify the OF for us.

I am sorry to say, but trading Gose for Choo at this point is one of the stupidest moves this franchise can make at the moment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diamond Joe Quimby

Amen. One thing that is quite evident, the MVP and Gold Glove awards are far more qualitative in nature than quantitative. I learned that lesson long ago.

This statement is tremendously accurate, which is sad for most deserving award winners who do not end up winning.

Quote:

Originally Posted by p.l.f.

a LH power hitter batting 5th

i think someone will take the #2 spot
rasmus lawrie bonifacio take your pick
stats will be juiced there with all the fastballs he'd get

they cant take a chance on Lind anymore
odds are he gets hurt even if he does come around

Lind is not a bad option if he hits anywhere from #7-9. It's become a fact that he cannot be relied on to be a solid contributor in the middle of the line-up. However, there isn't many options to upgrade at the moment, and other areas could use the upgrade more than Lind.

I hate having to say that because I feel Adam Lind is one of the most useless players in baseball, let alone on the Blue Jays.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Amazing Ralph

Do you think that a Rasmus + Arencibia combo could fetch much in a trade.

Yes, they can especially pitching-wise, however I do not think it's wise to trade Rasmus. He can absolutely break out this year.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RayzorIsDull

Why are stolen bases considered more valuable than HR's or RBI's? I guess you can pick and choose your stats to suit your argument. Are there any statistical measures that account for the position you bat in the lineup? Seems to me Trout would have an easier time scoring runs with a guy like Pujols batting 3rd as compared to Young batting 5th for the Tigers. Cabrera had much better stats in late and close situations as compared to Trout, better stats with RISP and 2 outs. This is what makes baseball interesting but it isn't interesting when people tell you what an injustice it is that Cabrera won the MVP. If Trout should have won MVP then let's just get rid of voting and base the MVP off of who had the highest WAR.

Stolen bases are not more valuable, however, it can be argued speed is. Trout led the league in runs created from when he was on base, and Cabrera was... -10 meaning he cost his teams when he was on base.

Again, Trout, created runs when he was on base. He scored the most times from 2nd base, going first to third, etc. How is this a product of Pujols hitting 3rd?

Cabrera had more opportunities with runners in scoring position than Trout. However, their RBI average based on the opportunites was identical. So, what you said is not an accurate statement.

It was an injustice. If you disagree, tell us why (with an argument). People have already stated why Trout should have won.

I think it'd be awesome to see if someone actually posted why Cabrera should and rightfully won over Trout.

I look at it from July on when the pennant races started to heat up and when games matter. Here are the slash lines from each player. Sorry don't know how to make it look better.

You look at Cabrera and he really pulled away from August on and not only that with all the pressure of the triple crown weighing on him came thru. You cannot measure that part in the MVP by stats alone.

You look at Cabrera and he really pulled away from August on and not only that with all the pressure of the triple crown weighing on him he came thru. You cannot measure that part in the MVP by stats alone.

Trout started strong but faded when the games meant more and the season wore on.

Not saying Trout did not have an MVP worthy year but Cabrera was just a little bit better.

To me you just can't look at a guys stat line and say he was the MVP you have to watch the season see how it unfolds and how guys perform in a pennant race if he helped keep his team in the hunt or propel them to a playoff spot. There is way more to be looked at besides a stat line.

Until they clarify what an MVP is there will be times when a guy like A-Rod will win it from a last place team. He had a great offensive year but in no way helped his team achieve success.

Without a clear definition a guy can have a monster season and his team will only 63 games but can be an argument if he was not on that team they may have only won 34 games.

Just my opinion of the award

I don't see how you can justify him winning the MVP award because his team advanced to the postseason. The Angels finished with a better record, and if Trout was there for the entire season, they would have advanced too. You keep saying there's way more to be looked at besides the stat line, then compare their defence. I cannot stress how many hits the Tigers pitchers gave up (especially Porcello) because their infield was so bad defensively.

There's nothing positive out of Miggy's game aside from his stat line, he is definitely the most impressive hitter in the league, but his defence and baserunning are so costly that I don't see how you can consider him a better overall player (based on this season) than Trout.

And wow that's a very pricey deal for the Melk man. I thought maybe 1 year at 8 but 2? If this signing is finalized I hope he can prove more than his past seasons predicate.